tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post8421239932015434425..comments2024-03-26T12:56:54.350+00:00Comments on LMS Chairman: A challenge for Fastiggi and GoldsteinLatin Mass Societyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17951084157414901564noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-89163778959504600742017-10-06T04:17:18.482+01:002017-10-06T04:17:18.482+01:00Dear Dr. Shaw,
Dr. Dawn Eden Goldstein and I wish...Dear Dr. Shaw,<br /><br />Dr. Dawn Eden Goldstein and I wish to thank you for your tone of civility. We hope to reply with equal civility regarding your post: “A Challenge for Fastiggi and Goldstein.” <br /><br />Our points of response are the following:<br /><br />1. You are correct that “impressions” are subjective. Our point, however, is that your subjective impressions regarding papal words and actions are not shared by all. In justice there is always a need to determine what people mean before making judgments of potential heresy. When the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith examines cases of possible heresy, it follows strict norms of procedure in order to insure justice for the one accused (See CDF, Regulations for Doctrinal Examination, Ratio Agendi May 30, 1997; AAS 89 [1997] 830–835). If so much care is given to the examination of individual theologians before making judgments of heresy, should not the same be extended to the Roman Pontiff? Canon law tells us: “The First See is judged by no one” (CIC [1983] canon 1404).<br /><br />2. You object to the word “mostly” when we say that your claim of Pope Francis not wanting orthodoxy is derived “mostly [from] non-authoritative statements of the Pope” and not, as you assert, “entirely [from] non-authoritative statements.” Mostly is correct because, in addition to citing references to non-authoritative sources, the Correctio filialis speaks of “the propagation of heresies effected by the apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia and by other words, deeds, and omissions of Your Holiness.” As a papal exhortation, Amoris laetitia would carry the same authority of the ordinary papal Magisterium as St. John Paul II’s Familiaris consortio of 1981.<br /><br />3. You mention the private letter of Pope Francis to the Bishops of Buenos Aires as an example of something that is “impossible to square with the constant teaching of the Church.” Cardinal Müller, however, in his Sept. 28 National Catholic Register interview with Edward Pentin, said: “[If] you look at what the Argentine bishops wrote in their directive, you can interpret this in an orthodox way” (http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/cardinal-mller-discusses-the-cdf-the-curia-and-amoris-laetitia). What you consider “impossible” to square with orthodoxy, others find possible.<br /> <br />4. You ask what we would do if we thought the pope of the day were indicating non-authoritatively that bishops and ordinary Catholics should act and believe in ways contrary to the teaching of the Church? This is something purely hypothetical. Neither of us believe Pope Francis is asking people to act or believe in ways contrary to the teaching of the Church. If, though, we thought we were facing such a situation, we would make our concerns known to our Ordinary first and then, if need be, to the papal Nuncio or the Holy See. We would not have recourse to the mass media.<br /><br />5. Your point about Donum veritatis referring to theologians who reject the ordinary Magisterium begs the question because you have not established that Pope Francis is going against any teaching of the Magisterium. You cite canon 212§3, but you fail to mention that it also requires manifesting opinions with reverence toward pastors and attention to “the common advantage and the dignity of persons.” We question whether accusing Pope Francis of propagating heresies is really showing reverence, and we question whether this serves the common advantage of the Church and the dignity of persons. We also do not believe that the Correctio follows the guidelines of Donum veritatis, as we explained in our article. <br /><br />6. You mention that Matthew 18:15–17 allows for making problems public when private admonitions fail. This text, though, advises taking a brother to the Church for correction. It does not advise correcting the head of the Church.<br /><br />7. Like you, we wish to affirm the teachings of the infallible Ordinary and Universal Magisterium. We are not questioning your faith or sincerity; we are only questioning your methods. <br /><br />Oremus pro invicem,<br /><br />Robert Fastiggi, Ph.D. and Dawn Eden Goldstein, S.T.D.<br />Robert Fastiggihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02673011762019530760noreply@blogger.com